First up: Annual Code Updates

A new broom sweeps clean,
But an old broom knows where the corners are.  -- Proverb

Annual Code Updates:  What You Should Know

(Also referred to as "housekeeping")

The Community Development Code Annual Housekeeping Amendments (LU14-0014) carry some surprises.  Housekeeping is the wrong term however, since some residents would rather sweep these revisions out the door, not invite them in.  Below is just one example of what is in the document that people are not happy with - changes that break long-standing agreements, projects in progress or are a misrepresentation of the source, etc.

Exhibit  "A" LU  13-0014 (from the chart on the linked report -see above)

DESCRIPTION.                            SOURCE          CODE. REF.     M56.  Geog Area.      Notes
6   Replaces "may" with "shall"       Code Re‐Org.    50.05.004.5.d.i

      in Downtown Overlay re:           mistake

      Fourth Floor  

Let's compare the revision (above)  to the code as currently written (below):

d.    Number of Stories

New buildings shall be at least two stories tall, and new and remodeled building shall be no greater than three stories tall, except:

i.    Fourth Story

A fourth story may be permitted subject the following:

(1)    The fourth story is residential and is contained within a gabled or hipped roof;

(2)    The site is sloping and the structure has three or fewer stories on the uphill side;

(3)    The fourth story is significantly stepped back from the building plane created by the lower stories; or

(4)    Fourth story design elements are used to break up the mass of a building, create visual interest and variety, hide mechanical equipment, define an entry or define a particular building’s function. Examples of such design elements include dormers, towers, turrets, clerestories, and similar features.

"May" as currently written, implies that there would be a situation where a fourth story "may not" be permitted. This makes the fourth story of buildings within the Downtown Overlay at most three stories, and in some situations, there "may" be a fourth.  There is no criteria for when a building may or may not meet the qualifications for gaining a fourth floor, so one can assume it is left to the DRC and/or the City Council to decide.  The code makes the fourth floor discretionary.

Changing "may" to "shall" switches the rule to mean that: A fourth floor "shall" be permitted if the subsequent conditions are adhered to.  There is no discretion in this wording - either the applicant can or cannot have a fourth floor depending upon if he wants to complete a defined set of requirements.

This might apply to buildings like the Wizer Block and any new development downtown.  In its current form, it can be argued that the code only allows 3 stories outright, while a change to "shall" would make the fourth floor a right of the developer.  The code revisions do not have any explanatory paragraph describing the staff's error and the repercussions of changing the code at this particular date when the Wizer application has not been completed, and there are several other big developments being planned for downtown.  No matter, it's just one little word in the Annual Housekeeping Amendments.

Note:  I am not an attorney.  Consult an attorney for a professional, legal opinion of the discussion above.  The thoughts expressed above are my own opinions.

Code Updates: Dates you should know

Code Updates:  Dates you should know

Note: Information on all code changes, how to make comments, contact persons, dates for hearings, etc. Are on the main page for this topic.  I strongly encourage you to visit this page for updates and helpful information.

The planning department is making a sincere effort to incorporate public comments into their work and/or presentations to council, so PLEASE take the opportunities to do so.  1.  Make written comments to the planning staff (see instructions on main page above)  on each code section.  2.  Write testimony for the Planning Commission Public Hearings (or testify in person).   3.  Tell your friends.

 

Very Soon: 
Testify at the Planning Commission Hearing on May 28.  Testimony in writing at least a day in advance, preferably sooner, is welcomed.  Label your correspondence "Testimony" with the land use number (in this case LU 14-0014) and the meeting date.  Persons may also testify in person even if they have submitted written testimony.

Annual Code Updates (LU 14-0014)
May 28 – Planning Commission Hearing
June 29  - City Council


Coming up:
Send in comments regarding the non-conforming uses and variances (see main topic page for how to comment) and testify at the hearing (search city website for LU 14-0018) to find actual documents.  Read Staff Reports from previous Planning Commission Work Sessions for more information.  Be prepared for Planning Commission Hearing at end of July - you may send in written testimony whether you will be at home or on vacation. The same dates apply for both Nonconforming Uses and Variances and Clear and Objective Housing Standards.  

Non-conformities and Variances (LU 14-0018):
June 23 – Planning Commission work session to review public comments on Discussion Draft
July 28 – Planning Commission hearing
September/October, 2014 – City Council Hearing

Clear & Objective Housing Standards (LU 14-0019):
June 23 – Planning Commission work session to review public comments on Discussion Draft

Today: Community Development Codes (SmartCodes?)

CDC:  Community Development Codes

TODAY

Community Development Code Updates

Thursday, May 15, 2014

4:00-6:00 p.m.

Presentations at 4 p.m. and 5 p.m. with an opportunity for questions and 

discussion with staff after each session.

City Hall, Council Chambers – 380 A Avenue, Lake Oswego, OR

Community Development Codes
Community development codes are codes that a jurisdiction develops related to land use.  How land uses are organized - where the single family homes, multifamily dwellings, commercial and industrial uses go;  How transportation patterns intersect with land use;  How high and how big buildings can be, etc.  The "Euclidian" method of land use planning was to cut land up into zones, each having a distinct purpose.  The new thinking in land use is "form-based" codes that mix land uses rather than spread them out, with a few exceptions (industrial, adult businesses, etc.) .

Wikipedia has the best description of what SmartCodes are  (the link is HERE) and how they fit into what is being suggested for the streamlined code updates for Lake Oswego.  The Wiki page is a must-read to prep you for discussions on development codes, followed by searches for Smart Growth, etc.  One aspect of the Lake Oswego draft codes is that they are intended to "remove barriers to mixed use."  Or, to make it easier for developers to construct the kinds of buildings they need to make mixed use construction "pencil out" and thus achieve the planning goals of a "compact city" form.  Mixed use with medium or high density buildings that include housing and retail, AND are connected to (high capacity) transit, constitute the goals of Smart Growth.  SmartCode is about creating "vibrant" "walkable" "mixed use" neighborhoods.  Look at the draft codes and imagine Lake Oswego in the future.  Is this what Lake Oswegans want?  

Modern SmartCodes are "Form-based" codes.  
From Wikipedia, "SmartCode"
Model Code – The SmartCode is a model code, with metrics designed to create a generic medium-sized American city structured into walkable neighborhoods. The model code is freeware, a template meant to be locally customized by professional planners, architects, and attorneys.

Form-Based – The SmartCode is a form-based code. Conventional Euclidean zoning regulates land development with the most emphasis on controlling land use. Form-based zoning has been developed over the last twenty years to overcome the problems of sprawl created by use-based codes. Form-based zoning regulates land development with the most emphasis on controlling urban form and less emphasis on controlling land uses (although uses with negative impacts, such as heavy industry, adult businesses, etc. are still regulated). Urban form features regulated under the SmartCode include the width of lots, size of blocks, building setbacks, building heights, placement of buildings on the lot, location of parking, etc.

Wish you were there

Last night (Tuesday, 5/13/14) was a City Council study session concerning the TMDL Implementation Plan (Total Maximum Daily Load) and its relationship to the Sensitive Lands Codes.

At issue was the use of the Sensitive Lands Codes being used as an implementation tool for meeting the requirements of the Clean Waters Act.  This is not the purpose of the SL program, however it was felt that to leave the TMDL as is would not only add another layer of government oversight to residents' backyards, it had the possibility of increasing the requirements on private property - back yards, front yards, and everything inbetween.

As usual, Councilor Hughes had done her homework.  Having studied the requirements of the MS4 permit (the DEQ permit for meeting the Clean Waters Act - see yesterday's post on MS4 for Dummies), she made a chart of temperature recordings going back several years.  The chart clearly shows that Lake Oswego's streams meet DEQ standards for temperature pollution.  Adding even more tree canopy for stream cooling was not necessary.

The debate was spirited to say the least.  The subjects of debate were so compelling that I can only describe a fraction.  You may watch it on TVCTV government channels as reruns, or as streaming video on their website.  The arguments by both sides stand out as stark comparisons of the split between those who would have more controls on citizens, to those who believe citizens are responsible and can do well with minimum government oversight.

Why then, was staff (Stormwater Manager, Anne McDonald), suggesting that we needed to beef up our compliance measures if we already meet standards?

Why submit a report that would add regulations to an already burdened population (and maybe more) when there was no need to in the form of more tree canopy at streams, etc.

Why was this being done before the Council had approved a new Sensitive Lands program?

City Manager, Scott Lazenby, and Councilor Gustafson agreed with staff that we should send in the report now and change it later.  Council voted 5-1 to hold off on submitting the TMDL until the SL program was completed, and instead, send a letter explaining our progress toward meeting temperature goals in our own way.

Best Quotes of the Night: 

(from memory - see video for exact wording)

Lauren Hughes:  "It seems like putting an ice cube into a hot tub."  (On the effects of more regulation on tiny streams that flow into the lake and eventually into the Willamette River.)

Karen Bowerman:  "We meet the standards now.  Why make it any more complicated than that?  Why not just tell them that we meet standards, period?"  (On why staff needs to send in a report to DEQ that says what we will do more to  meet standards since we already meet them now.)

Jeff Gudman:  "Let's all take a 10 minute break."

Thursday will change this town forever

Maybe not just Thursday, but whatever gets approved after a few rounds with the Planning  Commission and the City Council will be set in stone.  Will there be higher buildings coming to LO?  Do you WANT there to be higher buildings in LO?

Note - The excuse that we have to have more density because Metro and the State mandate it is hogwash.  The city has enough housing capabilities now for 20 or more years which is all that is required.

There is no mandate to change commercial or housing codes except to ensure that our housing codes have a "clear and objective" path to development that meets state requirements.  In other words, these code changes are not necessary.   What will LO residents get out of them?  Will they be good for the current residents or will they ultimately make LO into an unattractive, urban jungle?

WARNING!

IF codes are changed now to a higher density, they CANNOT be changed back to a lower density!!!

We can always go up in the future, but we cannot come down!

Please read the proposed codes prior to the meeting and come with pithy questions and an educated mind.

• How high?
• What are the setbacks?
• What will downtown, Lake Grove or Kruse Way or the SW Employment Area look like with these codes?  
• Will buildings be higher in downtown?  
• How will changing "may" and "shall" in the codes now affect the Wizer project if the developers file a for a new permit?  
• What about the way the number of stories is figured on a sloping lot?  
• How are nonconforming codes used in a particular zone?  
• Aren't these codes more complicated, not less?
• Why combine zones?  Developers only deal with one zone at a time anyway.
• The codes seem awfully developer-friendly and not so friendly to Lake Oswego residents who will have to live with congestion and density.  Who are the codes for?
• Why mixed use?
• Why allow housing EVERYWHERE where in the city?  there are good reasons to separate uses into discrete zones.  Why abandon those principals now?  
• What will happen or CAN happen in (pick an area) with the new codes as written?  
• Why would Lake Oswego want or need this?  

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES

Date/Time: Thu, May 15, 2014 4:00pm - 6:00pm

INFORMATIONAL MEETING
THURSDAY, MAY 15, FROM 4-6 P.M., CITY HALL

You are invited to learn about proposed updates to the City’s Development Code, including:

• Amendments that are intended to streamline and simplify sections of the Code that allow adjustments or variances to code standards and regulate nonconforming structures and uses.
• Amendments that would bring the Code into compliance with State requirements for clear and objective housing approval standards, intended to reduce unnecessary costs and delays in permitting needed housing.
• Other amendments for the purpose of clarifying and updating various code provisions.

There will be presentations at 4 and 5 p.m. with an opportunity for questions and discussion with staff after each session. Drafts of the proposed Code updates will be available at the meeting.

The Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to hold public hearings on these amendments on May 28 (clarifying amendments), July 28 (variances and nonconformities) and August 11 (clear and objective housing standards). To learn more about this project, visit www.ci.oswego.or.us/planning, or contact Sarah Selden atsselden@ci.oswego.or.us or 503-697-6524.

Tonight. This one's a doozy

The City Council Meeting for tonight  (May13, 2014) is a study session only.  The original topic was supposed to be the Sensitive Lands codes, part of the Healthy Ecosystems portion of the Comprehensive Plan.  But lo and behold, the new, draft TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) Implementation Plan is the topic as it has language, regulations pertaining to the Sensitive a Lands codes.

What's this?  Isn't there a Tech Committee made up of staff and a council member working on changes to the onerous Sensitive Lands codes?   This little-known, wonky technical plan on stormwater pollutants is a snoozer.  This Plan however, comes into play as it relates to private property rights, something government in general and Central Planners are not fond of.

Read the agenda packet (click on the topic inside the Interactive Agenda to find subject materials.  This one is a doozy!  Staff either thinks the Council is not smart enough to get the purpose and basic chemistry of the DEQ Clean Waters permit, or they are wasting their time tonight so they can avoid a more serious discussion of the intent behind the suggested regulatory changes.  You be the judge.  Come to the Council meeting tonight, or watch it live on TCVTV or streaming online.

Personal Statement of the Environment, 
Property Rights, and Liberty 

By:  Someone who was: First Earth Day Celebration celebrant; Original OSPRIG member; Past member of the Sierra Club, Nature Conservancy, and Audubon Society; Current Master Gardener of Clackamas County

NOBODY wants to pollute and otherwise defile any streams, wetlands or upland habitats. Property owners in Lake Oswego have been superb stewards of natural resources, and left in control of private owners, these resources are more likely to be maintained in prime condition without increased regulations than with.   Take away a man's rights to his property and you take away his pride of ownership.  Who wants to working for the state and be reminded every day of government's force of police action behind every rule.  (I refuse to be PC when using gender nouns and pronouns.  If the reader cannot infer that the word "man" in a given context means "mankind," he may choose to be outraged and have his feelings hurt.)

Tiny spaces squeeze parking

Tiny spaces put squeeze on parking

Coming wave of micro apartments will increase Portland's density, but will renters give up their cars?

Portland Tribune, May 8, 2014. By: Peter Korn

 

by: TRIBUNE PHOTO: JAIME VALDEZ - The footprint Thurman development is bringing micro apartments 

to Northwest Portland--50 units, shared kitchens, no on-site parking and rents significantly less than for studio

 apartments. Footprint CEO Cathy Reines predicts fewer than ten of the buildings residents will have cars.

Excerpt:

Ten years ago, [Jeanne] Harrison says, she believed that apartment buildings without parking made sense because mass transit would become more available and convenient. That, she says, was the basis of policies she authored that allowed parking-free developments. But it hasn’t happened.

“You shouldn’t have to look at your watch or look at a schedule,” Harrison says of the city she envisioned when writing regulations she knew would make it tougher on inner-city drivers. “You should be able to walk to a corner and within five minutes a bus comes.”

In fact, Harrison says, mass transit availability has declined in her neighborhood and around the city over the last few years, as TriMet revenues have decreased. As a result, all those apartment buildings without parking aren’t necessarily attracting tenants without cars, as had been the plan. And the cars those tenants drive are competing for street parking spaces.

Throughout Northwest Portland, 1,475 new apartments have been built in the last three years or are under construction, according to a survey by NWDA board member Ron Walters. In the past two years, Walters says, only about a third to a quarter of those apartments have come with on-site parking.

Last year, a spate of no-parking development on Southeast Division Street pushed residents to lobby City Hall for relief. As a result, the city adopted an ordinance that basically requires new developments on commercial streets to provide parking for one fourth of its apartments.

A recent city survey of eastside apartment buildings that don’t have parking showed that 72 percent of the tenants owned cars. According to city planner Matt Wickstrom, the survey also found that most of those tenants did not drive to work or drive much at all, just like their Northwest Portland counterparts. But they still held on to their cars.

* * * * *

This is a good lesson for other cities to beef up the bus system* with more routes, more frequent service and extended hours.  Otherwise, better plan on parking for lots of cars.  Whether it is eco-friendly or not, it's what people want.
*Unless a city is one of the handful that can support an extensive rail system, buses will continue to be far cheaper, more efficient and more convenient for its users.

This is Public Involvement in Lake Oswego

Is this the best that the City of Lake Oswego can do?  Perhaps it is.  As a former teacher, I would judge this (Public Involvement) effort to be at best, a "D-" , and depending upon the intent behind the poor showing, maybe an "F".  The citizens of Lake Oswego deserve better.  In fact, we deserve the best money can buy, because with the most employees per capita (and overall), especially in the Public Works and Planning departments,*  there isn't any excuse for not getting the "A" level of service we are paying for.

It is fortunate for the citizens that, with a request for an extension, there is time for the TMDL Implementation Plan to be done right - to be done in the open so that citizens can know what is in it, and what the implications are.

You should, however, log on to the City's website and:  1. Read the TMDL and consider the impacts on you or your neighbors, and   2. Leave a comment at Open City Hall telling the city Staff what you think of their Plan, and/or what you think of section 5.4 Public Involvement.  Keep asking yourself why LO would rather not advertise the contents of this report, and how does the Plan fit with the City's commitment to "fix" the onerous Sensitive Lands and Tree Code regulations.

One last note- by submitting a comment to the Open City Hall website, you preserve the right to appeal the Plan to the director of the State DEQ.  (If I got that wrong, please let me know so I may correct it.). Please view these websites for further documentation on State law:

OAR 340-042-0070   Defines requirements for public involvement and how citizens may appeal for reconsideration by the Director - also has definitions for water quality terms
OAR 137-004-0080    Explains how those who have been affected by the TMDL can petition for a judicial review

Acronym List:  (Very helpful!) http://www.deq.state.or.us/wq/tmdls/docs/willamettebasin/willamette/acronymglossary.pdf

From the draft TMDL Implementation Plan: 

5.4 Public Involvement
The City addresses public involvement for management strategies described in Section 2 in conjunction with its NPDES MS4 permit requirements.
Public involvement will be provided for this TMDL Implementation Plan (and associated management strategies highlighted in Section 3.3) through use of the City’s Open City Hall website (http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/publicaffairs/open-city-hall). The TMDL Implementation Plan will be posted on the City’s website and available for public review for 14 days. Comments will be received, logged, and responded to by City staff prior to submitting the final version of this document to DEQ. 


* See the post titled, "Do you know the numbers?" For details on employee and budget data.

Another plan to review... but be quick about it!

This is being done with so little notice,

you know it can't be good.  

Read the document and then read the next 

Up Sucker Creek post about the Draft TMDL.

The TMDL Implementation Plan 2014 - 2019, that is the Total Maximum Daily Load Implementation Plan for the City's Healthy Watersheds, is being updated and adding new regulations regarding stormwater, and effectively, all water in the City.  I will read it to give you a heads up, but with Brown and Caldwell* as consultants on the project, what is there to worry about?    

The city has the TMDL Plan on its Open City Hall web page seeking comments from citizens.  Be quick!  There are only 6 days left for comments!  This topic closes at 5 pm, May 16.  Use the link above to access the survey.  The item is also featured in the News and Announcements section of the City Home Page.  So far (Saturday, May 10, 2:00 pm), there are zero comments.  Does anybody know who reads the statements and what is done with citizen comments?  

Comments sought on the draft Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) Implementation Plan for the City's Healthy Watersheds' Surface Water Management Program.  

Links to Public Work' plans, programs and reports are HERE.

* Brown and Caldwell is the firm that did the Water Supply Study for the Lake Oswego - Tigard Water Partnership.  They estimated our need to be much greater than it is which resulted in LO signing on with Tigard to build a bloated, expensive, and unwise water system that we don't own anymore (ownership is through a partnership).  Brown and Caldwell did not take our conservation efforts into account, nor the fact that LO had enough water to last for 20 more years with our current growth, usage and supply.  

It comes from near and far

The city development codes can either be your best friend or your worst nightmare depending on what you want it to do.  Should they direct buildings to be bigger or smaller, to be single or mixed use, to require sufficient parking or make allowances for less parking, to create skinny lots or not, and protect R-10 zones?  Who's goals and agendas are represented?

City codes are written, interpreted, approved, administered and enforced by the Planning Department.  It's pretty much a closed loop with stops at the Planning Commission and City Council along the way.  When help is needed, consultants who write codes for cities all over the Metro are, the state and nationally are hired.  Their viewpoints tend to be standardized because most cities have the same general "vision" of a "vibrant" and "walkable" town center and things that make them "resilient" and "sustainable."  Not to put too fine a point on it, but the planning profession has been listening to a messenger we have heard about and rejected.  How do citizens get the city they want?

How did things get so upside down?  When did public employees start telling the citizens how they should live instead of citizens telling the city how it's going to be?  How did citizens slip to the bottom of the barrel?

Maybe looking at the nation's premier planning association policies, sample codes and current thinking can give a clue where they plan to take us.  Why is another matter.

One last thing - on the APA Home Page, there is an item with a link to a nationwide survey of how Millennials and Boomers want to live.  You might think it would be useful information, but if you check out the fine print at the bottom of the summary, the Boomer cohort was limited to persons age 50-65 with at least 2 years of college.  This sampling is hardly the typical boomer.  The APA uses the Brahman class for its survey on attitudes, and then infers all boomers agree.  Back to school APA.

American Planning Association (APA)

The culmination of a seven-year research project, Growing Smart contains the next generation of model planning and zoning enabling legislation for the United States.

Growing Smart

States and their local governments have practical tools to help combat urban sprawl, protect farmland, promote affordable housing, and encourage redevelopment. They appear in the American Planning Association's Growing Smart Legislative Guidebook: Model Statutes for Planning and the Management of Change, 2002 Edition (Stuart Meck, FAICP, Gen. Ed.). TheGuidebook and its accompanying User Manual are the culmination of APA's seven-year Growing Smart project, an effort to draft the next generation of model planning and zoning legislation for the U.S.

Property Fairness

State Regulatory Takings Ballot Measures

In 2004, voters in Oregon approved a sweeping regulatory takings ballot initiative titled Measure 37. The measure undoes a wide swath of legal and legislative precedent by allowing individual landowners to claim compensation from the local community for any decrease in property value due to planning, environmental or other government safeguards.

As expected, radical property rights organizations have seized on the passage of Measure 37 to promote similar ballot measure in other states, and versions of Measure 37 are being quietly folded into ballot measures ostensibly aimed at eminent domain. Regulatory takings initiatives threaten a wide array of planning, environmental, historic preservation, and land conservation measures.

APA will monitor these proposed initiatives and provide regular updates, as well as resources to protect good planning, fairness, and communities of lasting value in your state.

From APA Fall 2013 conference:

"Policies for Building Stronger and More Resilient Communities"

Keynote Address

What will it take to move from "highways, houses, and hedges" to "trains, towers, and trees"? Explore the possibilities with Vishaan Chakrabarti, AIA, author of A Country of Cities: A Manifesto for an Urban America. His opening keynote will look at the broad policy changes needed to move toward a more prosperous, sustainable, and equitable future. Chakrabarti, a partner at SHoP Architects, directs the Center for Urban Real Estate at Columbia University's Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation. Earlier, he headed the Manhattan office for the New York Department of City Planning.

Speaking of codes...

This is a meeting not to miss!  Especially for the Mayor, City Council Members, the Planning Commission and the DRC.  These question-and-answer sessions that occur well before they come to the Planning Commission and then move on to Council for approval can be enlightening on their own and reveal citizen concerns.  There is information at the meetings that they never get in the stiff, choreographed testimonial and then rebuttal hearings.  The Development Codes are the MOST IMPORTANT part of the land use process along with zoning.

The entire Public Hearing process is skewed in favor of approval for whatever is brought before the Planning Commission and City Council.  Sometimes I don't know why I try (I can't believe I am saying that), but by the time the public approaches the Council to appeal their case, the decisions have pretty much been made.  Council will say (and some believe) that interested citizens will have been informed about the issues and have had their chance to attend meetings to influence the parties involved by expressing problems or concerns.

At Public Hearings, testimony is given just before staff gives their lengthy explanation of whatever the topic of the moment is.  And then, just as the Meeting Agenda says, the next item is "Council Approval."  It doesn't say, "Council Discussion," as that was supposed to happen during the work session before.  It doesn't say, "Council Deliberation" or "Thoughtful Reflection," or "Council Redirection," indicating they were willing to consider citizen testimony before they made any decision - perhaps waiting until the next council meeting to make any decision.  They might decide to ask staff to better reflect Council concerns about citizen testimony.   The one-sided staff recommendations bear more weight than any citizen.

Proposals for City Council and all Hearing Bodies:
To encourage Citizen Involvement, recognizing that some parties believe citizen involvement is not a good thing and seek to minimize the opportunities for, and impact of citizen engagement.

1. Some jurisdictions do not allow staff recommendations and instead require information on all sides of an issue with no favoritism.  Councils then discuss options and let staff know which way they wanted to go or where they needed more information.  
2. On all land use related issues, wait at least 1week following a Public Hearing to make a final decision, allowing time for consideration of new information and citizen rebuttal.  
3. Open Advisory Committee membership to applications with at least half (or more) being residents of the city with no other ties to the purpose of committee.  Advertise for committee members and include "members at large" in addition to stakeholder groups.  
4. Staff should log citizen comments at meetings (as practical) and in email, written or phone communications for distribution to the governing body.  Separate meeting notes and verbal communications from written forms as the latter are already recorded.  The collection of notes should become public documents. 
5. Allow greater access to written documents.  Those with a few pages are generally free, but larger documents and reports should also be free or at a greatly reduced price (5 cents per page).

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES

Date/Time: Thu, May 15, 2014 4:00pm - 6:00pm

INFORMATIONAL MEETING

THURSDAY, MAY 15, FROM 4-6 P.M., CITY HALL

You are invited to learn about proposed updates to the City’s Development Code, including:

• Amendments that are intended to streamline and simplify sections of the Code that allow adjustments or variances to code standards and regulate nonconforming structures and uses.
• Amendments that would bring the Code into compliance with State requirements for clear and objective housing approval standards, intended to reduce unnecessary costs and delays in permitting needed housing.
• Other amendments for the purpose of clarifying and updating various code provisions.

There will be presentations at 4 and 5 p.m. with an opportunity for questions and discussion with staff after each session. Drafts of the proposed Code updates will be available at the meeting.

The Planning Commission is tentatively scheduled to hold public hearings on these amendments on May 28 (clarifying amendments), July 28 (variances and nonconformities) and August 11 (clear and objective housing standards). To learn more about this project, visitwww.ci.oswego.or.us/planning, or contact Sarah Selden atsselden@ci.oswego.or.us or 503-697-6524.

Trouble in river city - Infill

Horrible infill?  Problems with aesthetics, compatibility, scale, height, mass and livability?  Is this happening in your neighborhood with tear-downs and larger-than-life replacements?  

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  If those words were measured in square feet, this photo might be worth 2,236 words (or more if you count the second new home next door).

Fields' house: 1,124 sf;   Renaissance Homes: 3,360 sf.  

(Figures from Portland Maps and city building permit).  

New house is 3x bigger than existing house next door!  

Higher, closer, more massive, blocks light, etc. - sounds like Wizers Block and any number of tear-down re-builds in Lake Oswego.  For point of reference, the proposed Wizer development is 3x bigger in size and mass than the condos across the street, and many more times that of homes in Evergreen.  The photo below is a smaller version of what Wizer's will look like. 

 Infill can destroy the fabric of a community, lower residential property values, and degrade the quality of life for those living in close proximity to the behemoths.  With the new development codes under construction now, we can expect the bigger-is-better thinking from City Hall for all LO commercial areas.  (Lake Grove too?)

Towering new homes trouble Reed neighbors
The BEE   May 7, 2014

by: DAVID F. ASHTON - Gary Richert and Heather Fields stand with cardboard signs, in silent protest in front of a couple of giant houses being built next door to their ranch-style homes in the Reed Neighborhood.

Many long-time residents of the Reed Neighborhood say they’re “fed up” with developers cramming in huge “McMansions” among the ranch-style homes on their streets.

“I no longer have sunlight coming into the south side of my house or yard,” said homeowner Heather Fields at 4817 S.E. 36th Place. “I no longer have a view from my windows. I no longer have a private backyard. I no longer can have a vegetable garden in my side yard.”

Fields said she wasn’t concerned about giving her street address, because everyone in the area knows her house. “When I'm out raking leaves, or walking the dog, neighbors referred to what was built next to me as ‘Brontosaurus’ houses,” Fields said.

“Everyone knows that a nice ranch-style house was on a double lot between me and my neighbor, Gary Richert. And now, there are two gigantic, enormous – ‘gi-normous’ –houses packed on the lot they split in two.”

Neighbor Gary Richert, at 4903 S.E. 36th Place, commented, “I'm glad they weren’t built on the south side of my yard. Otherwise, I would never be able to grow tomatoes again in my side yard.”

These aren’t the last out-of-scale houses coming to the neighborhood, Fields asserted. “The builder of these houses, Renaissance Homes, is ratcheting a marketing campaign by sending personal, hand-written letters to older people who own houses on double lots, offering to buy their houses.”

Richert added, “The developer says they are ‘adding value’ to the neighborhood. With this monstrosity towering over my yard, it certainly isn’t increasing the value of my house.”

More fat to trim

"Street Diet" likely on S.E. Foster Rd.
The Bee,  May 7, 2014

After three open houses, and then two “last and final” meetings held since 2012, what started as the “2003 Foster Road Transportation and Streetscape Plan” will finally be presented for approval to the Portland City Council in May.

The recommendation does include a reduction of the number of travel lanes from four to two, Leclerc acknowledged, with a center left-turn lane added, from S.E. 54th out to about S.E. 90th Avenue.

Drivers eastbound from S.E. Powell Boulevard will find “transition lanes” starting at S.E. 52nd Avenue. “The number of traffic lanes will increase as Foster Road approaches S.E. 82nd Avenue, to accommodate the traffic at the intersection,” Leclerc explained.

If the plan is adopted, S.E. Foster Road will get bicycle lanes, wider sidewalks, “pedestrian scale” ornamental street lighting at some locations, and added crosswalks marked off with “rapid-flash” beacons. “We're working with TriMet for more amenities and more shelters,” said Leclerc.

New phrase, same thing

New phrase, same thing:  The terms have to keep up with the changes in the certainty of science, especially when it is so uncertain.   

Global Cooling -- Peak Oil -- Global Warming

-- Climate Change -- Climate Disruption

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Report Uses Phrase ‘Climate Disruption’ As Another Way To Say Global Warming

May 6, 2014 10:06 AM

"Climate change’s assorted harms “are expected to become increasingly disruptive across the nation throughout this century and beyond,” the National Climate Assessment concluded Tuesday. The report emphasizes how warming and its all-too-wild weather are changing daily lives, even using the phrase “climate disruption” as another way of saying global warming."

"The report says the intensity, frequency and duration of the strongest Atlantic hurricanes have increased since the early 1980s, but it is still uncertain how much of that is from manmade warming." 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Playing with numbers - it's no game

BUDGET COMMITTEE MEETING 

TONIGHT   
May 8, 6:00 PM, City Hall

The Citizens' Budget Committee will meet tonight to discuss the Proposed Capital Improvement Plan list for 2014-15.  These are major expenses, and depending upon which ones are done, may or may not significantly change the way Lake Oswego looks and functions in the future.  Some projects are absolutely necessary, others can be questionable, and still others are crying for attention that did not make the cut.

What projects are you interested in seeing go forward?

In the unfunded portion of the Pathways section, Lake Oswego carries the cost for Regional trails.  In the unfunded Streets section, several projects are for the Foothills development but bear no mention of the source.  They come from the Foothills (Development) Framework Plan and have no purpose as yet, and may or may not be in a development agreement if and when the development is built.  Unfunded projects are built if and when funds become available - in this case, by the party stated in the agreement.

I believe that keeping existing infrastructure in good repair is the City's first priority.  Then comes street improvements relating to safety.  Finally, new infrastructure - only if citizens want it and want to pay for it.  That is one reason why General Obligation bonds are superior to Urban Renewal taxing - with the former, the citizens get to choose.

Check out the Budget Committee Interactive Agenda to see documents for each agenda item.
The meeting will be televised live on Tualatin Valley Cable TV (Ch. 23, 28, or 30) and available on video afterwords.  You can also watch meetings live via live streaming video. Visit:http://www.ci.oswego.or.us/boc/streaming-media. 

1. Roll Call
   
2. Approval of Budget Committee meeting prior minutes
   
3. Public Comment City Budget ‐ 3 minutes each (total duration 15 minutes)
   
4. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)
   
5. Debt Policy discussion
   
6. City Proposed Budget
   
   •   Add/withdraw Puts/Takes
     
   •   Deliberations on Puts/Takes
     
   •   Recommendations
     
7. Public Comment (3 minutes each)
   
8. Approve City Budget and Property Tax Rate
   
9. Adjournment – City Budget Committee Meeting 
   

Do you know the numbers?

I knew we had a problem; I didn't know the numbers.

DID YOU KNOW.... that 70% of the city's general fund budget (money not in a dedicated reserve fun) is spent on personnel services?  A study on personnel costs done by a sharp-eyed (MBA) member of the Citizen's Budget Committee revealed some startling data.  By researching and compiling this data, the city can begin to talk about the state of our finances with clear, objective facts.  Gerry Good has done the city a great favor - one that should be done routinely to examine how much and where our tax dollars are spent, and the value of city services.  The budget must include personnel reductions if there is to be significant change to its growing expense vs income problem.

Lake Oswego's expenses will exceed its revenue in just 24 months.  

Lake Oswego has more employees than other cities in Oregon of similar size, as well as number of number of employees per capita.  (Number of employees is expressed by FTE - Full Time Equivalent).

Lake Oswego was compared to 6 other cities with populations between 25,300 and 49,700: Grants Pass, Keiser, Oregon City, Tigard, McMinville and Tualatin.  Numbers are rounded.

To see and hear the PowerPoint presentation from the Budget Committee Meeting, see the  VIDEO.   Proposed 2014-2015 Budget Draft is HERE.  Below are some numbers from that sharp-eyed member of the Citizens' Budget Committee!

 * * * * * * *

OVERALL INSIGHTS:  

• Lake Oswego has the most FTEs on a gross and net basis; this is after a reduction of 10 positions during the last budget cycle
• Lake Oswego has significant variances in some departments 

THE NUMBERS:

• Total number of employees:  LO =  352.1  |  Avg. others =  199.7
• Employees per capita:            LO =  9.39    |  Avg. others =  5.77

Figures for 2013-2014 are after a reduction of 10 FTE in last budget cycle.  

• Percent of FTE per capita compared to partial-service* cities:  LO =  6.68  |  Avg. other = 4. 80  *Measurement is without Public Safety and other departments since some cities share these functions with other entities.  Lake Oswego is considered a full-service city because all of its services are done with city employees or subcontractors, not with other government entities. 
• Average cost per employee including salary and benefits is $120,000
• Annual rise in employee compensation = 6%
• Annual rise in property tax revenue = 3%

* * * * * * *

Annual rise in personal income in Clackamas County  2008 - 2012 = 1.81%*  and 2000-2012 = 3.24%*   Rise in retirement income for USA  2012 - 2013  =  2.6%.*  Personal income for all groups may also be flat or negative for some individuals.  Annual rise in utility costs = ?    * US Bureau of Economic Analysis    

The ability of residents to keep up with the growing 

cost of government is unsustainable!

Severe financial impacts are being felt now, and residents of all income brackets, fearing a more expensive cost of living in the future, have moved out of town or are making plans to do so.  

Departments with a higher than average number of FTE per capita:

Public Works      LO =   76.8  |  Avg. =  40.2

Other LO Departments showing significant differences --

IT                           
Library                      
Parks and Rec                    
Planning                                               

What Portland will look like

A great article in the current issue Portland Monthly magazine gives a detailed look at development scheduled to go up in Portland in the near future.  Coupled with the spurt of development driven by low vacancy rates and rising rents in close-in Portland, developers now have a good market that supports building apartments.  Soon the market will be overbuilt and the bubble will burst, just as it did for condos, but for now, the boom is on.

The new construction is not cheap and will necessarily be in the luxury class or near to it.  But renters will not be buying space as much as location.  This is one reason young people generally move out of the downtown area when they settle down and raise children - more space, good schools, and a back yard.  Notice too that parking is extremely limited - less than 1 space per unit, and usually those are an extra cost.

On the page "North Pearl: Going Up?" notice the size of the apartment buildings.  All but the tall towers are already, or may be approved under new codes in Lake Oswego.  The question is, what will Lake Oswego look and feel like?  How many more people would be added to an already built-out city?  And, is this what citizens want?  If not, let your City Council know so they can provide direction to the Planning Staff to change course and deliver a product that is more in keeping with what the community wants.  I heard a lot of people say 3 stories max. in the East End, with the 4th as an exception if done right is about right.  With a single word change in the code, 5 stories might be a new height instead.  I don't think more than a handful of people know that there is a max. height of 158' along the Kruse Way corridor.

The point is to make Lake Oswego the way regular Lake Oswegans want, not the way the planning theorists say we should live.  And, oh yeah, if someone tries to tell you we need to comply with rules that allow for this type of density, we don't.  Our current codes and zones meet all the state requirements now and can provide housing for the next 20 years as required.  But where do we stop?

It's our city after all. 

Plotting Portland's New Skyline

*Led by chief planner Joe Zehnder, Portland’s Bureau of Planning and Sustainability created this diagram for its Central City 2035 effort to envision a “Center of Innovation and Exchange.” The vision is still in progress. To find out more, go to portlandoregon.gov/bps. 

Lloyd District: Ecotopia


With a new lush public plaza and major face-lift for the aging mall, Portland’s first “ecodistrict” will be a lean, green, sustainable machine.
Published Apr 2, 2014, 9:00am
By Randy Gragg